On the Role of Counterfactuals in Inferring Causal Effects

Causal inference in the empiricalsciences is based on counterfactuals. The mostcommon approach utilizes a statistical model ofpotential outcomes to estimate causal effectsof treatments. On the other hand, one leadingapproach to the study of causation inphilosophical logic has been the analysis ofcausation in terms of counterfactualconditionals. This paper discusses and connectsboth approaches to counterfactual causationfrom philosophy and statistics. Specifically, Ipresent the counterfactual account of causationin terms of Lewis's possible-world semantics,and reformulate the statistical potentialoutcome framework using counterfactualconditionals. This procedure highlights variousproperties and mechanisms of the statisticalmodel.     

因果性的反事实条件分析:大卫·刘易斯及其批评者

刘易斯的因果性反事实条件分析是新休谟主义进路的典型代表,它试图通过引入"反事实条件"的模态范畴来弥补传统律则性理论的不足。然而,这一分析进路又产生了诸如可能世界的相似性、反事实条件依赖的时间箭头等新问题;本奈特、豪斯曼和霍维奇等人揭示了刘易斯的理论在这些问题上的根本困难。而这些困难的最终解决依赖于彻底抛弃休谟主义的因果性研究进路,转向因果实在论和实验的、操作的因果观念。     

“中层性质”的因果力与稳健性论证

"中层性质",例如化学、生物学、生态学等特殊科学关涉的物的性质,是否具有因果力,向来是科学哲学中还原主义与反还原主义争论的焦点问题。在为中层性质拥有自发的、不可还原的因果力辩护的论证当中,基于干预主义因果理论的稳健性论证,相较于传统论证具有一定的优势:中层性质的因果力来自于中层的因果共变的稳健性,因而独立于底层,进而能够回应因果排他问题。但进一步分析稳健性论证所提供的案例表明,事实上,稳健性所依赖的中层性质对底层性质的反馈性约束作用才是中层性质具有因果力的关键理由,然而该反馈性约束作用不普遍适用于所有的中层性质;换言之,并非所有中层性质都具有独特的因果力。     

适合度的倾向解释及其认知意义

按倾向解释，适合度是由期望的繁殖成功来说明的概率倾向。但是，不能像布兰登和彼蒂那样把这种倾向等同于实体的物理结构。按本文的主张，适合度说明了一组条件，而这些条件与实际的繁殖成功的关系是因果的。适合度参与了对一个一般选择模型的定义，而且在具体实例中承诺实际的繁殖成功是由生物的性质决定的。     

Quantum Mechanics in a New Light

Although the present paper looks upon the formal apparatus of quantum mechanics as a calculus of correlations, it goes beyond a purely operationalist interpretation. Having established the consistency of the correlations with the existence of their correlata (measurement outcomes), and having justified the distinction between a domain in which outcome-indicating events occur and a domain whose properties only exist if their existence is indicated by such events, it explains the difference between the two domains as essentially the difference between the manifested world and its manifestation. A single, intrinsically undifferentiated Being manifests the macroworld by entering into reflexive spatial relations. This atemporal process implies a new kind of causality and sheds new light on the mysterious nonlocality of quantum mechanics. Unlike other realist interpretations, which proceed from an evolving-states formulation, the present interpretation proceeds from Feynman’s formulation of the theory, and it introduces a new interpretive principle, replacing the collapse postulate and the eigenvalue–eigenstate link of evolving-states formulations. Applied to alternatives involving distinctions between regions of space, this principle implies that the spatiotemporal differentiation of the physical world is incomplete. Applied to alternatives involving distinctions between things, it warrants the claim that, intrinsically, all fundamental particles are identical in the strong sense of numerical identical. They are the aforementioned intrinsically undifferentiated Being, which manifests the macroworld by entering into reflexive spatial relations.     

从Simpson悖论看群体生物学中统计解释和因果解释之争

在理论的群体生物学中,有三种模型都是通过性状适合度(trait fitness)的分布来解释和预见种群结构变化的量和方向。双因子和单因子模型都将性状适合度看成是一种因果属性,而丹尼斯.沃尔什(Denis Walsh)等则指出它们仅仅是一种统计学的属性。笔者通过分析沃尔什的有力论证,尝试表明如果将性状适合度看成是一种因果属性的话,将导致Simpson悖论,因而是不融贯的。所以,关于种群结构变化的统计学解释要优于因果解释。     

The Deluge of Spurious Correlations in Big Data

Very large databases are a major opportunity for science and data analytics is a remarkable new field of investigation in computer science. The effectiveness of these tools is used to support a “philosophy” against the scientific method as developed throughout history. According to this view, computer-discovered correlations should replace understanding and guide prediction and action. Consequently, there will be no need to give scientific meaning to phenomena, by proposing, say, causal relations, since regularities in very large databases are enough: “with enough data, the numbers speak for themselves”. The “end of science” is proclaimed. Using classical results from ergodic theory, Ramsey theory and algorithmic information theory, we show that this “philosophy” is wrong. For example, we prove that very large databases have to contain arbitrary correlations. These correlations appear only due to the size, not the nature, of data. They can be found in “randomly” generated, large enough databases, which—as we will prove—implies that most correlations are spurious. Too much information tends to behave like very little information. The scientific method can be enriched by computer mining in immense databases, but not replaced by it.     

On Gene’s Action and Reciprocal Causation

Advancing the reductionist conviction that biology must be in agreement with the assumptions of reductive physicalism (the upward hierarchy of causal powers, the upward fixing of facts concerning biological levels) A. Rosenberg argues that downward causation is ontologically incoherent and that it comes into play only when we are ignorant of the details of biological phenomena. Moreover, in his view, a careful look at relevant details of biological explanations will reveal the basic molecular level that characterizes biological systems, defined by wholly physical properties, e.g., geometrical structures of molecular aggregates (cells). In response, we argue that contrary to his expectations one cannot infer reductionist assumptions even from detailed biological explanations that invoke the molecular level, as interlevel causal reciprocity is essential to these explanations. Recent very detailed explanations that concern the structure and function of chromatin—the intricacies of supposedly basic molecular level—demonstrate this. They show that what seem to be basic physical parameters extend into a more general biological context, thus rendering elusive the concepts of the basic level and causal hierarchy postulated by the reductionists. In fact, relevant phenomena are defined across levels by entangled, extended parameters. Nor can the biological context be explained away by basic physical parameters defining molecular level shaped by evolution as a physical process. Reductionists claim otherwise only because they overlook the evolutionary significance of initial conditions best defined in terms of extended biological parameters. Perhaps the reductionist assumptions (as well as assumptions that postulate any particular levels as causally fundamental) cannot be inferred from biological explanations because biology aims at manipulating organisms rather than producing explanations that meet the coherence requirements of general ontological models. Or possibly the assumptions of an ontology not based on the concept of causal powers stratified across levels can be inferred from biological explanations. The incoherence of downward causation is inevitable, given reductionist assumptions, but an ontological alternative might avoid this. We outline desiderata for the treatment of levels and properties that realize interlevel causation in such an ontology.     

论量子测量解释中的实在观

本文通过对不同量子测量解释的共同基本特征的考察,系统地阐述了量子测量解释中隐含的实在观的三个基本信条,(1)在本体论意义上,承认世界的独立存在性;(2)可以对物理过程进行统计因果性的说明;(3)物理世界具有非分离性或整体性.提出了以这种整体性实在观为前提,对量子力学的实在论解释要求重新审查传统真理观的观点.     

我们能够获得那些可能性或必然性的知识吗?--以威廉姆森的观点为契机

模态知识论的核心问题是:"我们如何证成或知道那些仅仅属于可能性(mere possibility)的宣称,与那些既非逻辑亦非数学的必然性宣称?"对于这个问题,威廉姆森论证并主张:由于每一类的模态宣称都逻辑上等价于某一类的反事实条件句宣称,因而日常透过"想象模拟"去评估反事实条件句的认知能力也就给了我们认知形而上学模态性的能力。威廉姆森并且认为,有些这样得来的反事实条件句知识和模态知识,既非先验,亦非后验,应被归属为第三类的"椅验知识"(armchair thinking)。作者们认为威廉姆森的理论虽大体上可信,但仍至少有九个问题需要进一步探讨。     

Cosmological Black Holes and the Direction of Time

Macroscopic irreversible processes emerge from fundamental physical laws of reversible character. The source of the local irreversibility seems to be not in the laws themselves but in the initial and boundary conditions of the equations that represent the laws. In this work we propose that the screening of currents by black hole event horizons determines, locally, a preferred direction for the flux of electromagnetic energy. We study the growth of black hole event horizons due to the cosmological expansion and accretion of cosmic microwave background radiation, for different cosmological models. We propose generalized McVittie co-moving metrics and integrate the rate of accretion of cosmic microwave background radiation onto a supermassive black hole over cosmic time. We find that for flat, open, and closed Friedmann cosmological models, the ratio of the total area of the black hole event horizons with respect to the area of a radial co-moving space-like hypersurface always increases. Since accretion of cosmic radiation sets an absolute lower limit to the total matter accreted by black holes, this implies that the causal past and future are not mirror symmetric for any spacetime event. The asymmetry causes a net Poynting flux in the global future direction; the latter is in turn related to the ever increasing thermodynamic entropy. Thus, we expose a connection between four different “time arrows”: cosmological, electromagnetic, gravitational, and thermodynamic.     

Can the Causal Paradoxes of QM be Explained in the Framework of QED?

Attemts to explain causal paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics (QM) have tried to solve the problems within the framework of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). We will show, that this is impossible. The original theory of QED by Dirac (Proc Roy Soc A117:610, 1928) formulated in its preamble four preliminary requirements that the new theory should meet. The first of these requirements was that the theory must be causal. Causality is not to be derived as a consequence of the theory since it was a precondition for the formulation of the theory; it has been constructed so that it be causal. Therefore, causal paradoxes logically cannot be explained within the framework of QED. To transcend this problem we should consider the following points: Dirac himself stated in his original paper (1928) that his theory was only an approximation. When he returned to improve the theory later (Proc Roy Soc A209, 1951), he noted that the new theory “involves only the ratio e/m, not e and m separately”. This is a sign that although the electromagnetic effects (whose source is e) are magnitudes stronger than the gravitational effects (whose source is m), the two are coupled. Already in 1919, Einstein noted that “the elementary formations which go to make up the atom” are influenced by gravitational forces. Although in that form the statement proved not to be exactly correct, the effects of gravitation on QM phenomena have been established. The conclusion is that we should seek a resolution for the causal paradoxes in the framework of the General Theory of Relativity (GTR)—in contrast to QED, which involves only the Special Theory of Relativity (STR). We show that causality is necessarily violated in GTR. This follows from the curvature of the space-time. Although those effects are very small, one cannot ignore their influence in the case of the so-called “paradox phenomena”.     

Embedding Quantum Mechanics into a Broader Noncontextual Theory

Scholars concerned with the foundations of quantum mechanics (QM) usually think that contextuality (hence nonobjectivity of physical properties, which implies numerous problems and paradoxes) is an unavoidable feature of QM which directly follows from the mathematical apparatus of QM. Based on some previous papers on this issue, we criticize this view and supply a new informal presentation of the extended semantic realism (ESR) model which embodies the formalism of QM into a broader mathematical formalism and reinterprets quantum probabilities as conditional on detection rather than absolute. Because of this reinterpretation a hidden variables theory can be constructed which justifies the assumptions introduced in the ESR model and proves its objectivity. When applied to special cases the ESR model settles long-standing conflicts (it reconciles Bell’s inequalities with QM), provides a general framework in which previous results obtained by other authors (as local interpretations of the GHZ experiment) are recovered and explained, and supports an interpretation of quantum logic which avoids the introduction of the problematic notion of quantum truth.     

Belief Systems and the Modeling Relation

The paper presents the most general aspects of scientific modeling and shows that social systems naturally include different belief systems (i.e. different models). Belief systems differ in a variety of respects, most notably in the selection of suitable qualities to encode and the internal structure of the observables. The following results emerge from the analysis: (1) conflict is explained by showing that different models encode different qualities, which implies that they model different realities; (2) explicitly connecting models to the realities that they encode makes it possible to clarify the relations among models; (3) by understanding that social systems are complex one knows that there is no chance of developing a maximal model of the system; (4) the distinction among different levels of depth implicitly includes a strategy for inducing change; (5) identity-preserving models are among the most difficult to modify; (6) since models do not customarily generate internal signals of error, strategies with which to determine when models are out of synch with their situations are especially valuable; (7) changing the form of power from a zero sum game to a positive sum game helps transform the nature of conflicts.     

A Computational Model of the Belief System Under the Scope of Social Communication

This paper presents an approach to the belief system based on a computational framework in three levels: first, the logic level with the definition of binary local rules, second, the arithmetic level with the definition of recursive functions and finally the behavioural level with the definition of a recursive construction pattern. Social communication is achieved when different beliefs are expressed, modified, propagated and shared through social nets. This approach is useful to mimic the belief system because the defined functions provide different ways to process the same incoming information as well as a means to propagate it. Our model also provides a means to cross different beliefs so, any incoming information can be processed many times by the same or different functions as it occurs is social nets.     

符号学视角下近代中国译名赋义实践新思考

外来词汇从西方土壤中移植到中国异域土壤的过程中,经历了二次命名、传播、变异、在汉语中固化或消失的发展历程。术语命名的对象是直接的,而二次命名对象是间接的,跨语赋义受到语符、语境、文化等多重因素的复杂影响。从本质上讲译名过程涉及两套符号系统之间的转换和意义实践。文章采用符号学的相关理论,通过文献细读和思辨,具体分析西方外来名词/术语在符号跨语实践中的赋义过程,即符号生成、符指过程、在汉语中获得合法身份,在此基础上描绘术语的运动轨迹模型,以期为中国近代译名实践的当代阐释提供新视角,并为外来术语译名统一和规范提供新思路。     

拉姆齐测验:一个新的解释思路

拉姆齐测验描述了人们决定接受p后,是不是接受q,从而对他的其它信念作最小修正的问题。20世纪60年代后,学界对这种思想进行了不同的解释,从总体上看,主要有两种:简单的拉姆齐测验和精致的拉姆齐测验。在分析这两种观点的基础上,我们认为这两种解释都存在一定的问题,在本文中,我们提出了一个基于拉姆齐测验的新的逻辑解释思路。     

社会突现论对社会因果的研究

社会突现论是基于系统论与心灵哲学等学科而发展起来的关于社会本质与社会现象解释的方法的一种新型整体主义理论。社会突现论认为,社会一方面由个体聚集突现而成,前者具有后者所不具有的特殊属性;另一方面,社会与个体属于不同的层次,前者不能化归为后者。社会突现论视域中的社会因果研究是以个体主义与整体主义之争为背景,对于社会层次是否具有因果效力的研究。社会突现论所关注的社会因果问题是某个社会事件是否能够作为不以个体意志为转移的因素对另一社会事件或社会中的个体产生影响。社会突现论认为,某个社会事件能够作为一个"独立"的因素影响其他的社会事件或社会中的个体。社会因果既与个体密切相关又不可化归为个体的属性。     

因果关系与因果排他性问题——论对金在权“因果排他性论证”的消解

金在权的因果排他性论证在当代心灵哲学领域对心理因果性问题的讨论中具有重要影响,本文力图通过对这一论证过程的详尽分析,探讨消解这一论证的可能途径,并通过对它的两个基本前提(物理世界的因果闭合原则和因果排他性原则)的分析,最终表明问题的症结在于排他性原则背后预设了一种不恰当的因果观念,从而达到对这一论证的消解。     

Remodeling the Past

In some of the papers in which she develops and defends the mental modelview of thought experiments in physics, Nersessian expresses the belief that her account has implications for thought experiments in other domains as well. In this paper, I argue, firstly, that counterfactual reasoning has a legitimate place in historical inquiry, and secondly, that the mental model view can account for such "alternative histories". I proceed as follows. Firstly, I review the main accounts of thought experiments in physics and point at some explanatory advantages of the mental model view. Subsequently, I argue that historians cannot dispense with counterfactual reasoning altogether and qualify a number of principled objections against the explicit use of alternative histories for theoretical purposes. Finally, I show that the mental model view can account for such thought experiments in history.